Skip to main content.

Archives

This is the archive for October 2005

Monday, October 31, 2005

Why that title? On this day?

Because this day is what that day, and all the days in between, have been all about for the Democrats. The liberal agenda is dangling by three ropes that keep it from falling into the pits of hell where it belongs. They've spent at least the last 80 years reinforcing those ropes, strengthening them layer upon layer. And they've had the gall to try to use those same ropes to strangle the rest of us at the same time. These three ropes give the liberal agenda cradle to grave control over all of our lives. They are education, the courts, and social security.

Though they've spent decades throwing up one secondary lifeline after another - taxes, the environment, "equal" rights, social "justice" and the like - those only serve to entagle decent human beings and to obfuscate the central core of those three ropes that mean everything to them.

In 2000 they sensed - to say "thought" would be giving they're animalistic instincts too much credit - that the mood of the country was turning against them and the George Bush might just be the one to cut right to that core. They tried to subvert the election process to keep him out of office, knowing that with the average age of this Supreme Court, that the next President would have a clear and open shot to hack away at one of those three ropes. They failed at that, in part due to a conservative block that also sensed the importance of all this.

Because they failed, their only hope has been to weaken Bush using whatever opportunities present themselves. Do they conscientiously object to the war in Iraq? No, they could care less except to the extent that it is an opportunity to weaken Bush. Do they care about Valerie Plame being outed? Of course not, it's merely a way to kneecap Bush at what they rightly see as a critical time. Do they care about reforming campaign financing? Only if reform means that they can get further control of the process in order to keep future Bushes out of the White House and his like out of Congress.

Bush has kept them on the defensive. He's already begun hacking at two of those three ropes. Social Security reform was a huge threat to the core liberal agenda. Should it ever pass with any level of privitization - and don't assume it is dead, it is just biding its time - it will completely undermine and destroy one of those three ropes in just a few generations. The appointment of Janice Rogers Brown and Pricilla Owens to the Federal bench sent them into a panic, and caused them to overplay their hands. The appointment of John Bolton to the UN Ambassadorship - and Bush's treatment of the UN in general - has begun hacking away at what could be a fourth and nearly decisive supporting rope - one that may render the strength of the other three moot by making an end run around their necessity - before they had a chance to fully establish it.

The Democratic spin has already begun, and the talking points have been long planned. A good rule of thumb with liberals is that whatever they accuse their opposition of, they have either already done it, or are planning to.

This nomination is divisive? It is only in that it is not perfectly in line with their agenda. It is their way or no way, and they will happily split the country into as many factions as it takes to weaken it to the point where no opposition to them is possible.

This nomination doesn't preserve the established balance of the court? It is Democrats who packed the court in the 30's, and who have sought every opportunity to replace a conservative with a liberal ever since.

This nomination is radical? Nothing is more radical than their vision of what the US should be and their willingness to subvert and undermine the constitution via the courts in order to see that vision made real.

This nomination is "troubling" and obstructionist? If Alito is the strict constructionist he is said to be, his tenure on the bench could only serve to obstruct the liberals efforts to cause trouble for anyone wanting to live their own lives, to own propety, and to produce and to earn money.

Our Constitution is a deeply flawed document in execution, but it's intent was mostly sound. The liberals have, almost from its inception, sought to use it's flaws in execution to undermine its intent. If Alito is determined to use that intent as his guide, it won't make this a free country, but it could set us on the road to being the country the framers intended it to be. A long and winding one to be sure, but the right road at least.

This is the Armageddon battle for the liberals. They are fighting for their very lives and they know it. This will be a WWIII of "nuclear" exchanges, underhanded tactics, and all the dvisiveness and radicalism the Democrats can muster. They will tear this country to shreds if they have to on the slimmest of hopes that it could prevent this appointment.

My guess is it won't work, despite all the damage it could do, and the beginning of the end of the liberal stranglehold on all that is right and good is actually within reach. Then we can begin the business of dealing with the conservative stranglehold on all that is right and good in a clean fight without all the "enemy of my enemy" bullshit clouding our judgement.

Monday, October 24, 2005

No, it hasn't happened... yet. But that's just a matter of luck. And when it does happen, my reaction will be uncontrollable laughter. I don't wish this on any of them, but the inevitable reactions of shock and surprise will be too much for me to watch without busting a gut, and I will have exactly ZERO sympathy for whichever one of these morons it eventually happens to.

All I've seen on the three major cable news channels is idiot reporters standing out in the middle of a hurricane wringing their hands over the fact that so many people decide, based on their own individual assesment of risk vs cost, NOT to heed the "mandatory" evacuation orders.

"I don't understand how people can choose to remain here." Note the word "here". It refers to the very place the reporter is standing at that moment. No, actually, it doesn't, most of the people who don't evacuate are hunkered down in their houses - the reporter is standing out in the middle of the street.

"People should not be in the place I am standing right now."

"It's too dangerous for anyone to be in the place where I am standing right now."

"Authorities have ordered everyone out of the place where I am standing right now."

"You're an idiot if you're standing around in the place where I am standing around right now."

The flip side of this is that those "authorities" are now ordering evacuations at the first sign of a spring drizzle that might bring the risk of getting your shoes wet from stepping in a puddle. Yes, it is generally wise to get out of Dodge if a hurricane is headed right for you. But the warnings given now are nothing more than the nanny state run amok. "We" have to keep "our" people safe and dry and fed. Forget individual judgement, individual risk assessment, we have to tend our flock and get them all to shelter for their own good. And don't worry if you lose everything, you're under our protection and we'll make you whole again. This attitude provides NO information as to the actual risk, and NO incentive to judge for yourself how to respond.

And the reporters eat it up. It provides great drama and great ratings if they treat every storm and every city that might get overcast and rainy from it as the scene of impending armageddon.

But increasingly, even they are oblivious to the actual risk. They blow it up everywhere, with the result that one of their team is standing around in a city a hundered miles from landfall calling every downed power line "devastating damage", while another of them is standing right in the bullseye complaining that people aren't leaving, apparently not noticing that that includes them.

These guys think they walk on water. They seem to think that their press pass will be honored by those 115 mph winds and 12 ft storm surges. I wish them luck, but they're setting themselves up to be the subject of some very entertaining video one of these days.

Sunday, October 09, 2005


Take my love, take my land
Take me where I cannot stand
I don't care, I'm still free
You can't take the sky from me
Take me out to the black
Tell them I ain't comin' back
Burn the land and boil the sea
You can't take the sky from me
There's no place I can be
Since I found Serenity
But you can't take the sky from me...


See it. Just go see it.

If you liked the series (Firefly) you've probably already seen it. See it again (you know you want to).

If you never saw the series, go see it, then go buy the series on DVD.

If you hated the series, go see it. Then buy the series on DVD. Unless you're just a die-hard SF hater, you'll change your mind.

This is not only one of the best SF movies in its own right that I've seen, it's probably the most profoundly moral movie I've ever seen - as was the TV series. You might miss the message, its that much not in your face, but you'll leave the theater thinking you might just rather be on that crew than anywhere else in the 'verse.

UPDATE:
You might have heard of Orson Scott Card. He's done a little writing before, and he does a great job of providing some of the whys and hows that I left out above:


If Ender's Game can't be this kind of movie, and this good a movie, then I want it never to be made.


Read it here.

Saturday, October 01, 2005

I've had to disable comments for now. I haven't been very actively posting, and I haven't had a legitimate comment for weeks, so it's no loss for the moment. When it was two or three comment spams a day, I could just delete them, but now it's two pages per day, and I can't keep up.

I don't have time right now, but there are several options available. The most likely is a CAPTCHA system, which is a mild inconvenience to people leaving legitimate comments, but nearly impossible for a bot (so far).

I don't have to tell you how frustrating this is. This blog is my property, and spam is trespassing. In a sane society that honors property rights, spammers of all kinds would be shut down and shut down hard. But we don't live in such a society.

When I have time to implement a system that keeps them out, I will open up comments again. If I can find a "nuclear option" to hurt them bad, I will use it.